J.K. Rowling looks to find fault anyway she can with Trump

Love > Hate

J.K. Rowling of "Harry Potter" fame compared the size of the royal wedding attendance to President Trump's inauguration crowd. 

Very mature. Very mature.

Sure, there were hoards of royalty fanatics to Windsor Castle. They came from all over the place to see the royal wedding. But did British author Rowling have to rub it in? 

You can't blame President Trump for the people who failed to show up for his inauguration. Whether or not to attend an event is an individual decision and let's face it, a presidential inauguration is a lot less interesting and less romantic than a royal wedding.

It's clear that Donald Trump is renting space in Rowling's brain. She is even compared Trump's hairdo to Meghan Markle's hairdo. But insofar as the wedding vs. inauguration, Rowling posted side-by-side photos of the crowds that attended each event and tweeted next to the image, "Love > Hate."

Very mature. Very mature.

Anyway, Rowling received over 40,000 likes and 8,000 retweets.

After she tweeted, BBC Three mimicked her and tweeted the same comparison photo of the wedding crowd and Trump's inauguration switched around and wrote: "Just saying :)" This tweet gained over 90,000 likes and 34,000 retweets.

It seems as if Rowling is as guilty of hate as she accuses Trump and his supporters to be.

Facts don't care about J.K. Rowling's feelings, however,  it turns out that while 100,000 people visited Windsor for the royal wedding festivities, Trump had between 300,000 to 600,000 people attending his swearing in, according to Vox.

I know that if President Trump discovers Rowling's tweet, he will take to Twitter to point this out to her. 

Very mature. Very mature.

Tweet

Unequivocal Proof that Fox News Sucks | NewsReal Blog

Unequivocal Proof that Fox News Sucks | NewsReal Blog

We can ask ourselves why is it that the mainstream media (MSM) is so leftist. I believe the answer to that has to do with the notion that we, as individuals, need to have a cause that we believe in--kind of like religion or politics. Liberalism appears to be a philosophy held by people who care about people. But I have a different take on the matter; I believe liberalism, (which I confess, I was a card carrying member of back in the day), is a political philosophy whose basic tenets believe that people are weak, need to be held up by government, and need to be treated equally with even those who actually work for a living. Note that CNN carried the royal wedding as their main story and Fox carried the tornadoes in the south.

Liberals are the first to yell "racist" when any dialog is voiced about opinions that run counter to what they believe. If it isn't racist, then it's another buzzword used to disarm a counter argument like calling conservatives "stupid" and we should go back from where we came. (Tell that to George Soros and liberals will jump on your case faster than you can say "Obama is a socialist").

I long for the day when we can have an unbiased news media, when it will really be news and not opinions; when we can be treated as thinking adults rather than spoon fed children whose ideas more often come from Marxist college professors and the MSM.

The link above is a blog by Diane Shrader, who also writes for NewsReal, a blog site headed by David Horowitz. The article is spot on, I feel, about the current situation in the media today and why the best place to get the news is from a blog--no, from several blogs and from several opinions. I trust that by doing so, you can form an informed opinion and perhaps see through the smoke of liberal thinking.

Peace.